Dollhouse

Dollhouse has just been cancelled. And for all of us who watched Firefly killed in its prime, that’s undoubtedly a reason for unhappy mumbling and irate Tweeting. But with a first season so clumsy and flawed, were the problems of Dollhouse fixable, or was there something at its core getting in the way of real success?

Whedon fans beware - I adore the man’s previous TV work with the love of a twice-incarcerated stalker, but if you’re of the opinion that Dollhouse is, so far, a work of similar or equal genius, this piece is going to be pretty painful for you. As such, I ask you to hold on until part three, where the slagging-off will ease a little.

This piece has been written without yet seeing a single episode of season two, and I’ve wholly avoided spoilers for it. I’m hearing ‘improved, but not wholly fixed’, but whatever its qualities it wasn’t enough to halt the crash-diving ratings.

Series one spoilers aplenty, though, in this first part of Put Away The Dollhouse, Or: Who Am I Supposed To Identify With Here? Meet The New Meme

If nothing else, Dollhouse was right at the centre of the zeitgeist. It’s a world of avatars. Gamer was in cinemas recently, along with the drab Bruce Willis-starring Surrogates, James Cameron’s Avatar is on the way, and certain themes also surfaced in John August’s underrated existence flick, The Nines.

Then there’s the honey-coated network pitch - “she plays a new role every week - many of them action or sex related!” - which is pretty irresistible. The ‘Charlie’s Angels goes sci-fi’ campaign, with cute outfits aplenty, pretty much Photoshopped itself.

But here’s the thing: Is the life of the avatar ever going to repay a viewer’s investment of time, energy and emotion? Is the Active’s journey the right one to be following?

Click on the link for more :

http://www.noisetosignal.org/2009/11/put-away-the-dollhouse-part-one