NB: This review was originally printed in the Spoiler Zone in issue 182 of SFX and is reflective of our assessment of the show at the time of viewing.
Written by: Joss Whedon
Directed by: Joss Whedon
Rating: 
THE ONE WHERE
A troubled young woman named Caroline is offered the opportunity of a clean slate, which she accepts. Her mind is then wiped, she’s renamed “Echo” and she becomes an “Active” in the Dollhouse, where she’s continually reprogrammed to fulfil the needs of paying customers. This time she’s hired as a hostage negotiator, but things go wrong when it turns out that her “profile” came partly from one of the kidnappers’ former victims. Meanwhile, FBI Agent Paul Ballard tries to track down the Dollhouse despite cynicism about its existence from his bosses.
VERDICT
Dollhouse has come in for a lot of criticism ever since it started, and the reasons for that criticism are clearly visible from the outset. On the most basic level, the writing lacks the spark of previous Whedon shows – there’s very little wit and the dialogue isn’t as snappy as we’ve come to expect. Much of it feels poorly thought-out, too, from patronising audio-visual links (Ballard’s discussion with his superior is intercut with a boxing match, and Topher delivers a line about running away from things while pointedly watching a Doll using a treadmill) to plain old logical errors (the FBI doesn’t really believe the Dollhouse exists but any playboy with cash to burn can hire a million-dollar escort for the evening?).
And none of that begins to touch the generally uncomfortable nature of the premise: desperate people, many of them young women, being stripped of their identity and autonomy and turned into empty vessels that can be given any personality their keepers decide – and the Dollhouse staff seem eager to lord that over the oblivious Dolls. Considering that Joss Whedon is arguably one of the strongest feminist forces in TV today, it’s no wonder that has alarmed many viewers. Whichever side of the fence you sit on, though, this is a disappointing start to the series. Teething problems? Let’s hope so.
WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?
Topher explains that the Actives’ profiles have to be spliced together, scrapbook-style, from real people’s personalities, which is why Echo is she’s short-sighted and asthmatic this time. But surely such physical disadvantages could be removed? Why leave them in?
WIPE TIME
The wipe montages go on for a long time. Echo’s first wipe is 28 seconds long, but we’ll forgive that since it’s the first one. In later episodes, though...
SPECULATION
The Dolls’ names are all taken from the phonetic alphabet. Does that mean there can only be 26 working Dolls at any one time? And what are Dolls Hotel, Kilo, Papa and Whiskey like?
BEST LINES
Gabriel: “You told me you were good with people.”
Echo: “I misspoke. I'm good at people.”
Leah Holmes
|
Teething problems most certainly.
And your last question is answered most fascinatingly...
Posted by Bryn Davis (127.0.0.1) on May 19, 2009 at 10:44 PM BST #
Posted by nofairytale (127.0.0.1) on May 19, 2009 at 10:51 PM BST #
Posted by Wil (127.0.0.1) on May 19, 2009 at 10:59 PM BST #
However, given that many of us have now seen the first 12 episodes it seems logical to publish a review for those just approaching the show for the first time that is informed by the journey taken through the later episodes (this could still be spoiler free). For instance, an adjustment that I had to make is that Whedon's snappy dialogue from the Buffy/Firefly shows doesn't sit so well in this NEW world. We don't just love Joss for the patter of his banter, this is a different story he's telling and there is a different rythm to it.
Also, the uneasy premise at the core of the show is the vehicle by which the show eventually begins to ask fundamental questions about the nature of, well, our natures. What makes us us? Murky, questionable stuff, sure, but in Joss' hand we now know it IS handled interestingly.
So, in short, a fresh review woulda been interesting.
Posted by Paul (127.0.0.1) on May 19, 2009 at 11:01 PM BST #
Yes. The second half of the season vastly improves on the first half, which in itself, improves with each episode as characters and wider story arcs develop.
Stick with Dollhouse, its definately worth it.
Posted by Josh (127.0.0.1) on May 19, 2009 at 11:13 PM BST #
Also, the show *is* pure Joss, but without any of the sugarcoating his other shows have had. So if Joss to you means quippy dialogue and all that, this is never going to work for you. If Joss means to you layered, morally complex television... hold on for #6 to the end. Still uneven, but hitting those moments of greatness that I've only ever seen in Whedon shows.
Posted by Maggie (127.0.0.1) on May 19, 2009 at 11:17 PM BST #
That's not what he said, but so many people seem to have missed this subtlety that it's obvious it should have been written differently.
He said that there's a reason WHY some personalities drive themselves to be the best at what they do. If you have someone who is driven to be an athlete, and it's because until they were 20, they were a fat slob who was then in a car accident, you can't extract the skills that make a world class athlete from the fire point that made them want to become one. In this case, the negotiator is an incredibly driven personality who became that, at least in part, because of the disability, in this case, asthma (or really, the weakness that asthma makes you feel). There might be people who don't feel any particular need to overcome asthma, say; if one of them became a great neurosurgeon, the imprint on the wedge would not necessarily include the asthma, because it's *not part of the skillpile*.
Some people go through tragedies, and become great artists. Some go through the same tragedy, and become a depressed person who watches teevee all the time. What we do with our negatives matters, too. The negotiator couldn't have asthma removed because it was integral to why she developed the skills to start.
Posted by thespian (127.0.0.1) on May 19, 2009 at 11:27 PM BST #
Posted by Ethan (127.0.0.1) on May 19, 2009 at 11:30 PM BST #
Posted by nofairytale (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 12:00 AM BST #
Speaking personally, I thought both shows were rubbish at the start, and both marginally improved by the end, with KR having the most potential to go somewhere. Dollhouse would probably have been far better served as a self-contained single season (26 eps) story - in the same way that Heroes could have been astounding if they had done that. Alas, US television is rarely able to take that view (although things like Daybreak show that it can be done.)
Posted by Scurra (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 01:27 AM BST #
Posted by Steven Neeson (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 01:55 AM BST #
Against all odds, Fox has given the nod to Season 2 of Dollhouse, to begin this Fall. That's 13 new episodes, with an option for more.
Please, keep watching. You'll thank me!
Posted by not_Maggie (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 02:26 AM BST #
This is an excellent show. Yes, it is different from other Joss Whedon projects, and so what? Time moves on, people expand horizons. Joss isn't looking to do another Buffy, Angel, or Firefly. It's Dollhouse. I'm fairly certain if Jimi Hendrix could be asked, he would tell you hell no I didn't want to play Purple Haze every set.
The acting, writing and production are typically top notch Whedon style.
Yes, there were some glitches at the start. Fox the network did not agree with the show's continuation of mythology of the DH at first. They pressured the production companies involved to change the pilot. It never aired. They had their hands in things for the first five episodes. They wanted stand alone episodes.
After then, Joss got the go ahead to do what he wanted. I enjoyed the early episodes. But they really pick up on the heat and story in Episode six on. You won't be disappointed if you are a Joss Whedon or sci-fi fan.
There is an official wiki for the show. nofairytale gave the link but here it is again: http://dollhousewiki.fox.com
Other useful links would be:
http://www.dollverse.com/
http://dollhouseactives.blogspot.com/
http://whedonesque.com/
Twitter has many Tweeters concerning the show.
http://twitter.com/
I am on there if anyone cares to look me up.
I'm Dollbait on the fox wiki, dollbait on Twitter.
There are many of us on Twitter, including Sci-Fi UK who I have found very warm and open to communicate with.
Posted by Rick_dollbait (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 02:45 AM BST
Website: http://twitter.com/dollbait #
Just you wait. :-)
Posted by kreider204 (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 05:13 AM BST #
Now that The Sarah Chronicles has been axed whats the odds on Summer Glau jumping ship to Dollhouse? Maybe she's Foxtrot :)
Posted by Bish (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 08:18 AM BST #
I thought Eliza Dushku did a fantastic job (When she was being led in for her second 'treatment', I was screaming 'DON'T DO IT!') & I'm very excited to find out where the series will go. So happy it's got a second season too. Go Joss!
Posted by New DH fan (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 09:02 AM BST #
The criticism that this maybe should have been a fresh review rather than a reprint of the original spoiler zone review is a fair one. I have seen the whole first season and I do agree that it picks up enormously. However, I don't think the fact that the series improves later has any particular bearing on my opinion (and that of many other viewers, judging by the discussion on our forum) that this first episode was disappointing.
New DH fan - good suggestion, I'll amend this page accordingly.
Scurra - the Knight Rider spoilers were originally printed as roundup reviews rather than full-length ones, and we'd also reviewed the whole season of Knight Rider by the time it aired in the UK, so it made sense to put the whole list up on one entry. I will be putting the rest of the Dollhouse reviews online shortly, so keep an eye out for them.
Posted by Leah Holmes (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 10:03 AM BST
Website: http://www.sfx.co.uk #
Posted by Chrismk (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 10:06 AM BST #
'You won't be disappointed if you are a Joss Whedon or sci-fi fan.'
I am a Sci Fi fan, I was hugely disappointed by the whole first series. I am baffled as to why it was given a second series (especially given the premature demise of the vastly superior Firefly.)
Posted by Chrismk (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 10:58 AM BST #
'Also, the show *is* pure Joss, but without any of the sugarcoating his other shows have had. So if Joss to you means quippy dialogue and all that, this is never going to work for you. If Joss means to you layered, morally complex television... hold on for #6 to the end. Still uneven, but hitting those moments of greatness that I've only ever seen in Whedon shows.'
I utterly disagree. I would say that 'pure Joss' is typified by sharp dialogue, twists in the plot and surprises (along with strong female characters and incredible chemistry between characters). This has none of those. I also can't agree that this is 'morally complex television', there is nothing complex about rich people using brain wiped hot people as sex slaves, regardless of whether they volunteered. If you want to see a show with 'moments of greatness' akin to Joss' other work, try Leverage.
Posted by Chrismk (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 11:04 AM BST #
Your verdict, well it starts badly, stating that Dollhouse came in for criticism ever since it started, it actually came in for a lot of criticism since way before it started. The concept is something that makes people uncomfortable, and that's exactly the point. He shows you something that seems utterly wrong, using people as slaves, but then from the off, he shows you how there is another point of view. We see Caroline agreeing to this. She is given a choice, and she takes it. Now her alternatives may not have been very appealing (we aren't actually told what they are) but she has them, and so she has a choice. We then see a very shallow view of things, with Topher talking about giving two people a wonderful weekend. And then of course let's not forget that Miss Penn saves the child. If the Dollhouse didn't exist to offer this service, do we know that the girl would have been saved? Now I am in no way saying that all this justifies the Dollhouse's actions, but it makes you think, is it as bad as the initial concept suggests?
As for your "very little wit" comment, I have to ask, did you actually listen to the show, or Buffy? Because there was as much wit in this as in Buffy easily. So I have to assume either you didn't listen to this, or you're remembering all the witty comments from the whole of Buffy and mentally shifting it into a single episode. And there was a fair amount of snap to the dialogue, maybe not as much as his previous creations, but hey, if you want to just go back and rewatch Buffy or Firefly, go ahead, and stop writing reviews on this show.
The thing with Ballard and the fight, well I actually kind of agree with you there, in that it was unnecessary. IF you were going to create an intercut scene to act as a metaphor, well then it was actually done very well, but honestly, there was no need for it. As for Topher and the treadmill, well there isn't really an issue with that, it just shows a person using an example from their environment to create an argument, we all do that everyday, so I don't get why you consider it patronising.
And where has it said that any playboy with cash to burn can hire a doll? So far we've seen two clients, with little information about who they are, how rich they are, how they know of the dollhouse etc. You're making judgements about things you don't yet know and then you're using those assumptions to build incorrect arguments. You state that the FBI don't believe in the dollhouse yet as Ballard says, his direct superiors can't take him off the case as someone above them clearly DOES believe in the dollhouse and wants someone on the case.
"And none of that begins to touch the generally uncomfortable nature of the premise" Well gee, he setup a show based on an uncomfortable premise and you want that very premise and it's uncomfortability wrapped up in a single episode? Go watch a film, not a TV show. Seriously. You are supposed to think about this yourself, not have it handed to you complete and nicely wrapped up. See my points above on the different viewpoints provided. AND OMFG!!!!! SOME OF THE DOLLS ARE YOUNG WOMEN!!111!!ONE!! Wow, some of the dolls are young women. It's an outrage! But also some of them are young men too, no need to mention that eh? Also I don't really see "the Dollhouse staff seem eager to lord that over" the dolls. Well yes their attitudes towards the dolls isn't that of one to an equal, but I question your use of the expression, lording over. I didn't really see that, except perhaps from Laurence, but he is hardly the whole staff now is he?
And so a feminist can't write a story in which women are exploited? Did you watch Buffy? She was pulled from pillar to post by everyone and told time and again how she was essentially property. That went on for five seasons, until she stood up to Quentin and told him how it was. If you think that this isn't going to be addressed in the series then I suggest you just stop watching, because you are missing the point wholesale.
Teething problems? Yes, but none of what you pointed out.
OK you were clearly listening to Topher's explanation of why she was near-sighted and asthmatic because you mentioned him watching the treadmill, but you didn't actually absorb any of what was said otherwise you would ask "Why would you do that?"
Hotel, Kilo, Papa and Whiskey will be just like the rest of the dolls obviously. Why would they be any different?
If you are going to write further reviews of this show please remember it's not popcorn TV, you have to actually turn your brain on and think about it.
Posted by Dev Jones (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 11:23 AM BST #
Posted by andy winter (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 11:31 AM BST
Website: http://www.moonfacepress.com #
Posted by Chrismk (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 11:45 AM BST #
Posted by Kell Harker (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 12:37 PM BST #
Posted by LM (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 12:46 PM BST #
Posted by New DH fan (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 01:28 PM BST #
'at least Joss Whedon is keeping up his proud tradition of making flop shows that don't last very long'
Buffy lasted 7 seasons, Angel lasted 5, only Firefly was short lived. 1 out of 3 is not a tradition.
Posted by Chrismk (127.0.0.1) on May 20, 2009 at 03:49 PM BST #
"Buffy lasted 7 seasons, Angel lasted 5, only Firefly was short lived. 1 out of 3 is not a tradition."
I agree Buffy was his one and only success, Angel was axed after 5 seasons, Firefly didn't make it past it's first season, the movie spin off serenity was the biggest flop movie of that year, now Dollhouse is on it's last legs with a 2nd season on reduced budget. More flops that successes i'm afraid.
Posted by LM (127.0.0.1) on May 21, 2009 at 01:42 PM BST #
Posted by Jon (127.0.0.1) on May 21, 2009 at 04:37 PM BST #
'I agree Buffy was his one and only success, Angel was axed after 5 seasons, Firefly didn't make it past it's first season, the movie spin off serenity was the biggest flop movie of that year, now Dollhouse is on it's last legs with a 2nd season on reduced budget. More flops that successes i'm afraid.'
5 seasons is not a flop. I've no idea what data you are referring to about Serenity being 'the biggest flop movie of that year'? According to boxofficemojo, the worldwide grosses equalled the estimated production budget, meaning that with it's healthy DVD sales, it made a profit (so that's hardly a flop) It also took more domestically than Elektra which came out that year and cost a lot more to make. (It made the top 100 grossing films of the year domestically. Whilst I accept it didn't set the box office alight, it's far from a flop, let alone the biggest flop of that year). Dollhouse, despite being rubbish, has made it to a second series, which is more than can be said for a lot of shows and is too early to be deemed a flop.
Posted by 127.0.0.1 on May 21, 2009 at 08:28 PM BST #
Posted by Chrismk (127.0.0.1) on May 21, 2009 at 08:29 PM BST #
Posted by korilian (127.0.0.1) on May 22, 2009 at 12:20 PM BST #
Chrismk when a show is axed, that's not a good sign, Angel may have ran for 5 series but it was still axed due to low ratings hence it's a flop, not really hard to understand. Serenity, as explain above was a flop, it didn't make back the money it cost to make and advertise it, i get my data from every movie mag and official sites going which said it was the biggest flop of the year. Finally Dollhouse has got a second season but only on a REDUCED BUDGET which is not good for any show still in it's infancy. Prime example: Enterprise only had a 4th season because they agreed to a reduced budget and then it was axed, don't take any bets on there being a Season 3. If you enjoy these shows, that's fair enough but don't pretend they were successful because in terms of other shows they weren't.
Posted by LM (127.0.0.1) on May 22, 2009 at 01:04 PM BST #
Posted by ian (127.0.0.1) on May 22, 2009 at 02:49 PM BST #
What you've written, does not make sense. Not even a little bit. EVERY series gets axed sooner or later. Angel lasted 5 seasons, that's 2 more than the original Star Trek, does that mean Star Trek was a flop?
I provided a source to prove Serenity did ok... not fantastic, but ok. Please provide a link that states Serenity was the worst flop of the year? Just one link, that's all I ask.
I don't know what you've got against Whedon, or Whedonites, or perhaps you're just a troll?
Posted by Chrismk (127.0.0.1) on May 22, 2009 at 07:14 PM BST #
Posted by Wonderous Wolf (127.0.0.1) on May 25, 2009 at 09:10 PM BST #
Not every series is axed at all, some come to a natural end and it is the decision of the makers to end it. When the networks decide to no longer make something usually due to low ratings this is called cancellation or being axed. Not really hard to comprehend.
I have nothing against Whedon or the people who do but the fact is nearly everything he does ends up on the scrapheap and is cancelled due to no one watching his programmes and yes it has happened more times than not. So enjoy as much as you like but let's not pretend the man makes good tv because clearly the majority of the audience disagree.
Posted by LM (127.0.0.1) on May 27, 2009 at 12:57 PM BST #
Posted by Henrik's (127.0.0.1) on June 04, 2009 at 05:57 PM BST #
Posted by Ian Manning (127.0.0.1) on June 11, 2009 at 04:36 PM BST
Website: http://www.vieresidents.org.uk #
That said, if Dollhouse can maintain the same level of momentum and excitement in season 2, we will be once more praising Mr Whedon and glossing over those inital episodes in the TV history annals.
However,I have to wonder why it is that this particular series limped into being and then sprinted to the finish line (to use a lame sporting metaphor).
Sure there are complex moral and network issues - it's not all quips and kickboxing - but we've all watched Battlestar - we can cope.
Any ideas?
Posted by Nicky (127.0.0.1) on June 17, 2009 at 03:15 PM BST #
Despite the fact you are blatently on a superiority kick and enjoy riling Whedon fans. I am going to attempt to make a point you can agree with.
Personally, I am pro-Whedon but even if I wasn't his record stands for itself. 12 seasons of Buffy/Angel and massive DVD sales for Buffy, Angel (and to a lesser extent Firefly) does not a failure make. He must be doing something right.
Also, your point about shows being cancelled seems a bit weak. As all shows now appear to be contracted for 7 seasons and then axed as and when they run out of ideas and viewers or are simply put on Friday nights when everybody is out enjoying themselves. DVD-R ratings can be high and this doesn't contribute to the overall ratings figures which is why DVD sales are important. Bargain bin or no bargain bin - something crappy isn't going to receive massive sales just because it's cheap.
These natural endings where producers suddenly decide they have gone as far as they can are few and far between. Feel free to provide examples (I know you will feel obligated to patronise - sorry - *re-educate* me ;) )
Also, if you hate Whedon why did you watch Dollhouse in the first place - surely you knew you would hate it purely on that basis.
I enjoy his shows - you don't - any further discussion is essentially moot.
Posted by Nicky (127.0.0.1) on June 17, 2009 at 04:13 PM BST #
Posted by leftofthestage (127.0.0.1) on August 16, 2009 at 02:01 AM BST #