Joss interview re: Dollhouse etc
Dec. 4th, 2009 02:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shapinglight![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
petzipellepingo linked to this very interesting interview with Joss Whedon, re: Dollhouse and Where It All Went Wrong.Casting spoilers and teaser-y bits about the finale in the interview for those of you who are trying to avoid any/all spoilers.
A few thoughts on the interview behind cut.
Well, not so much where it all went wrong, maybe, but interesting to see that Joss feels the intrigue/conspiracy theory part of the story has somewhat taken over from what he originally intended, which was to focus more on the Dollhouse clients and why they might want what they want. So it all leaves him (if I read him right) only partially satisfied - pleased with what he managed to say about the nature of identity, not so pleased with what he managed to say about sexuality etc. Not that he would be any kind of writer if he were completely satisfied. Won't happen.
Very, very pleased to see him say he has no intention of continuing the story in comic book form. Also, it amuses me no end that he saw no similarities between himself and Topher until someone pointed them out to him. The similarties (not in their geekitude, but in their power/lack of it over their own creations) between Topher and Joss is one of the first things that struck me.
Hope you enjoy tonight's eps, you lucky Americans (and others - realise I am pretty much alone in not d/l'ing stuff I want to watch, but there it is).
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 04:39 pm (UTC)Oh no, no comics. How will we cope?
(Hah.)
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 05:13 pm (UTC)Just popping in to tell you that you are not alone in the non-downloading. I don't watch anything via computer. If it's not out on DVD via netflix or available via the TV - I can't see it.
(Hence the reason I haven't been able to see Misfits or Season 2 Merlin or Doctor Who until they air here. Also haven't seen S2 of True Blood or S4 of Dexter or the Wire...while others have but via downloads or cable.)
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 05:27 pm (UTC)Noted this in passing too. "Fox sort of has that reputation for sexy or edgy or blah, blah, blah, but they don’t actually want that and it frustrates me. It’s the classic American double standard --torture, "Great." Sex, "Oh, that’s so bad."
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 06:09 pm (UTC)SuckFail?" critique that seems to be the only thing coming out of the show ending. (I'm really worried that Dollhouse is going to go down as "the rubbishy show that shouldn't have been made" in comparison to Firefly's "the amazing show that wasn't allowed to get made".) Because I think the fact that Joss wasn't allowed a complete free rein worked in his favour (I find the unaired pilot a bit of a mess, frankly). We were/are starting to explore the client's side with DeWitt and Victor, which to me seems far more successful in its continuing arc than one-off episodes about clients and their sexual fantasies would have been (it could have been done of course, but I think deeply exploring complicated motivations with any nuance in 45 minutes is always going to be tough).I promise not to squee too hard on Saturday/Sunday/whenever I see it. (I'm going home this weekend and have a lot to do tomorrow, so I don't know when I'll see it.)
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 06:29 pm (UTC)To be honest, I read that as Joss's sense of humour rather than that he actually didn't recognise the similarities: "No, no, the creepy ubergeek genius who manipulates people's lives and constructs fantasies is nothing at all like me, honest." It's a shame tone of voice doesn't come through in text.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 07:12 pm (UTC)Apparently not. :) At least two others are in the same boat, whether by choice or necessity.
The conspiracy aspect interests me a lot more than exploring endless self-denials and self-indulgences (besides, we had the fun of Man on the Street where we got a good idea of what some of those might be).
I agree, have to say. I can see why Joss might have wanted to use the dolls' clients and their wishes to say things about sex/other desires that aren't to do with sex, but I think a little of that probably goes a long way. It's good to get viewers to sit up and think, but putting them every week in the position of the abusers might not have been the wisest choice. There are plenty of moments that make you sit up and go, "Huh!" anyway without the doll characters being entirely reduced to sounding boards.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 07:14 pm (UTC)Also, I hope you get to see those programs soon, though I can't imagine how Misfits will go down in the US.
Having said which, Skins is quite popular, so I hear. It's like that, only with superpowers.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 07:18 pm (UTC)I agree. Of course, he's not alone in that, but there are precious few like him. I hope he does get a chance make a cable show. I would love to see what he would do, given the relative lack of restrictions on cable shows.
That he succeeds conveying what he wants is another question, but he has to get praise at least for trying.
Yes, agreed.
It’s the classic American double standard --torture, "Great." Sex, "Oh, that’s so bad."
Yes, I noticed that too, and agree with Joss, though can't help raising an ironic eyebrow given that torture has been depicted several times in his shows, and worse than that, shown as effective.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 07:25 pm (UTC)I didn't take quite the same thing from the interview as you, because although Joss is saying why he thinks the show failed, I don't think he's saying that because he doesn't think it's any good. He is saying that it didn't do what he wanted it to do originally, but that's not the same. In fact, reading that, like you, I think we're lucky he couldn't do what he wanted to do, because what we got is much better.
And even if all those silly people on Whedonesque are comparing Dollhouse unfavourably with Firefly, what do they know? You and I can still wave the Dollhouse is better, so there! banner.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 07:26 pm (UTC)True, though I've seen clips of Joss saying stuff and not realised he's joking. His joking voice is the same as his not-joking voice.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 07:42 pm (UTC)I'm happy to accept I might have missed the main gist of the article, because, dammit, this is the show Joss should miss when it goes!!
Even if it doesn't have Nathan Fillion in it!no subject
Date: 2009-12-04 09:24 pm (UTC)I agree. We few, we happy few.
I'm also less than elated to see him doing more Dr Horrible. Did not like it.
Good luck with your proposal. I can't imagine you not getting a place.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-05 01:10 am (UTC)While I agree with
I think the fact that Joss wasn't allowed a complete free rein worked in his favour (I find the unaired pilot a bit of a mess, frankly).
Word. Especially after reading this interview and the direction he wanted to take it.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-05 03:17 am (UTC)Haven't gotten around to watching Skins, so can't comment. It is popular here, though. BBCAmerica has it. I just have no time.
Why don't you think Misfits will go down well in the US? From it's description it sounds like it would do fine...
no subject
Date: 2009-12-05 04:06 am (UTC)Tonight was great. You have something worth looking forward to!
no subject
Date: 2009-12-05 11:39 am (UTC)Yes, I agree. I'd put it up there with his Secular Society speech (well, not in the same class, but in that general direction).
It is certainly possible that Fox have some input into the content of the comics. If, for instance, Joss had wanted to do re-Spuffy while ending Bangel once and for all, I don't think Fox would let him. I think they would let him do the reverse and that he hasn't possibly suggests that Joss doesn't want to do that to the Spuffy fans (though I am probably reading far too much into it, and it's just, as I've thought all along, that he has zero interest in either pairing). When I'm being very paranoid, I also see Fox at work over at IDW, where Spike has stray female characters thrown at him as love interests on a regular basis (though so far, none have stuck), while Angel remains alone. I keep imagining some shadowy Fox exec tellingn Chris Ryall and co that Angel is not allowed a love interest because ultimately he's destined for Buffy.
(I don't know if you know, btw, but Brian Lynch said in an interview that he and Joss had discussed pairing Spike up with Nina. It was probably supposed to be a joke at both Angel's and Spike's expense. Spike ends up with yet another girl who'd rather be with Angel. I'm glad they didn't do it).
Who knows? I think on the whole Joss is doing what he wants to do in the Buffy comic, which would be my cue to say I'm quite glad he wasn't able to do that 100% in Dollhouse, because I don't think I would have liked the direction he appears to have wanted to take it as much, though perhaps if the show hadn't been cancelled Joss might have had more of a chance to have his cake and eat it too, ie. explore the avenues he wanted to explore as well as have the mystery story.
Why don't you think Misfits will go down well in the US? From it's description it sounds like it would do fine...
I suppose it's because it's so very British, plus there's an awful lot of sex in it. I don't know. I thought the sex at least would be very frowned on. As Joss says in his interview, American network TV is very prudish about sex but quite happy with violence and torture. Over here, it's the opposite. However, maybe BBCAmerica doesn't count as network TV?
no subject
Date: 2009-12-05 11:45 am (UTC)I think possibly the direction the show went was more of a natural thing than Joss lets on. AtS when it started was going with the format of Angel Helps Helpless Person Of The Week. But Joss and Greenwalt soon realised that the fans were far more interested in the ensemble characters than they were in stray guest stars. I thought they achieved quite a good balance by the end of season 1/beginning of season 2, but in later seasons, the show leaned too much the other way.
Anyway, given how good the supporting cast is in Dollhouse I think it was inevitable that those characters' stories would be more compelling that Stray John Of The Week, no matter what his/her motives, though the occasional story like that works very well thrown into the mix.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-05 11:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-05 06:11 pm (UTC)Gah. That would've been awful. Glad they didn't go there.
However, maybe BBCAmerica doesn't count as network TV?
No, definitely not network TV. That's just NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, and CW. In fact, BBCA's not even in most basic cable packages - you have to pay extra for it.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-05 06:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 03:06 am (UTC)Over here it is the opposite.
Well it's...I guess it depends on what you mean by a lot of sex? I've watched Being Human, Torchwood, Doctor Who, Prime Suspect, East Enders, several of the mystery series, several of the comedies including Coupling and Manchild, Hex, and of course Benny Hill...and there is no more sex on any of those series than there is on US network shows. If anything there's less - the US network tv shows depict a lot more than those did and far kinkier. Unless they are cutting things out, but from the recaps I've read on LJ, they don't appear to be. I haven't seen Skins, but it doesn't appear to be much more risque than say Gossip Girl or Buffy S6 was.
However maybe BBCAmerica doesn't count as network TV?
Nope. It's standard not basic cable. Not everyone has it. That said, everyone who has basic cable does get F/X - which used to do Buffy reruns and Angel reruns, and now does edgy dramas that...well, let's just say redefine edgy. Have you ever watched Nip/Tuck?
Nip/Tuck pretty much has done everything you were worried about Whedon doing and then some. Graphic exploitive sex scenes. Yep.
There was one scene in which the woman wanted to be frozed and then woken up with sex by Christian (who is played by Julian McMahon - who was Dr. Doom in the Fantastic Four flicks and the devil prosecutor in Charmed). And they showed it in graphic detail. Another episode had Christian and Scean in what amounted to a foursome, also in graphic detail. We also had Scean having wheelchair sex and having a diaper put on him, when he didn't need the wheelchair. Another had him having sex with an anatomically correct doll or KimberDoll based on a porn queen who was also Christian's ex-girlfriend. And well, there's more...you name it they've done it. And it is at times very sadistic not to mention borderline misanthropic/misogynistic- when people online ranted or critiqued Dollhouse, I kept thinking in the back of my head - have you ever watched Nip/Tuck?
(Nip/Tuck by the way is also a FOX series and F/X is owned by Fox.
Which is why that bit in Whedon's interview is so bewildering and you can sort of see why Whedon thought Fox would have no problems with his vision - since it was and is actually less disturbing than Nip/Tuck. And Nip/Tuck has lasted six seasons and been very popular.)
no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 04:18 am (UTC)I understand where Joss is coming from about the turn the story has taken. But I think it's a good thing for now, especially since FOX would never let him explore the implications of the Dolls' sexual use properly anyway. And the conspiracy plot does explore other possibilities for Doll technology that are really quite interesting.
But I think this could have been great: how we incorporate other people in ourselves and how we project ourselves onto people and how everybody relates to everyone in their lives through the filter of their own beliefs, experiences and memories. That to me is kind of fascinating. What we think we want from each other when we say "I love you" or any of those other things is, I think, very complex and sometimes very depressing and sometimes kind of weirdly beautiful.
I also thought what he had to say about digital filming was interesting. I don't understand why this isn't used by everyone. The differences in early and later Buffy, for example, are very apparent because of the type of film used.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 08:31 pm (UTC)I agree. I also think he's explored a lot more of the sexual thing than possibly he thinks he has. It doesn't all have to be as up-front as Eliza in her dominatrix outfit, after all.
I also thought what he had to say about digital filming was interesting. I don't understand why this isn't used by everyone. The differences in early and later Buffy, for example, are very apparent because of the type of film used.
Yes, true. I think Joss was able to use better film stock after season 3, hence the improvement in picture quality. I thought that he was talking about filming in HD. Is that the same as digital? I'm very ignorant about it, I'm afraid.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 08:33 pm (UTC)Me too. I can't think why either of them even considered it. Can only have been some kind of Jossian joke.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 08:38 pm (UTC)Really? Given what Joss says, I'm very surprised by this. Has he managed to miss it all somehow? Maybe what he means is not so much that there's no sex but that it's shown in a very conventional exploitative way with no questions asked?
I haven't ever seen Nip/Tuck, in fact, and after reading this, I don't think I'll be in any hurry to do so.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 10:08 pm (UTC)Whedon like most tv writers probably doesn't really watch that much television. Standard cable in the US, which most people have, now has over 1000 channels. A TV show like say Nip/Tuck or BattleStar Galatica can stay on-air for over 6 seasons as long as it brings enough people from a select demographic, and it is never high in the ratings...probably averages less than 2 million a year, if that.
I'm guessing that was exactly what Whedon meant. That it's not so much that there is no sex but that it continues to be shown in a conventional manner and an exploitive one - with no questions asked and no one made uncomfortable. Remember - network tv's sole purpose is to sell advertising space. The commericials are how they make money. So if your tv show is in any shape or form putting those commericials in a bad light or making people think twice about buying the advertisers products or enraging people in such a way that they would boycott the advertisers products - you probably will be cancelled. And I think Dollhouse made the advertisers uncomfortable.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 01:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 01:39 pm (UTC)I can see how it would. I can't imagine what companies would want to see their products advertised during the show.
Is a cable package expensive in the US?
no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 01:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 05:45 pm (UTC)Car companies, maybe - but they are pricey and tend to go for high profile. I have however seen car and pharmaceuticals advertised, along with a lot of Best Buy and Mac ads. It's really not commericial friendly. Which is why it probably would have worked better on Showtime.
Is a cable package expensive in the US?
Depends on the package. A lot of them are combo deals - digital phone, high-speed internet, and tv = $39.99 a month (plus all the taxes and fees) = $75 or thereabouts. It's the fees that kill us.
Basic is about 30 or thereabouts.
Standard is about 45.
DVR - 8.95 a month.
Each state is different, and each area. There's also various cable companies - Cable Vision, Comcast (Optium), Verizon Fios, and Time Warner. Each vary in price depending on packages. And each have great deals to start.
If you have high-speed internet, DVR, and standard via Time Warner - it's about 127 a month. If you have just standard cable? 65 a month.
There's also satellite or DirectTV - where you pay about half of the amount with a bit etc for a DVR device. But not everyone can get that.
And it doesn't come with the same channels as the cable device does.
(Friday Night Lights for example is only available via DirectTV, while the local 24 news station that I love is only available via Time Warner Cable.)
Most people in US, who aren't unemployed, homeless and living in tents, have either basic or standard - because you can't watch tv at all without it. And that has gone down considerably in cost. A few have a digital converter that allows them to watch broadcast. Others have cancelled it completely and just buy DVD's or download on their computers.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 05:49 pm (UTC)It gets a lot of movie trailers, car ads, video game ads, and computer ads - basically ads targeted towards a predominatly young male demographic. They aren't marketing Dollhouse towards women, but rather towards men. Same with Sarah Connor - it was marketed heavily towards young men.
The only show Whedon's done that was marketed towards women heavily - was Buffy and it was to tween girls.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 08:51 pm (UTC)But back to what Joss said, he was talking about using digital vs. film in the actual filming process. But the end result could be released in any sort of format, even video. (I wonder, does anything get released on video any more?)
no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 10:33 pm (UTC)I agree that it's difficult to see where the blu-ray audience will come from, unless it's marketed as a luxury product just for the reproduction of HD programming.
But back to what Joss said, he was talking about using digital vs. film in the actual filming process
Is this supposed to be something he's only just started doing, because it's only recently become available?
no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 10:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-08 01:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-10 11:42 am (UTC)I suppose I see the logic of that, and obviously there are many aspects of Dollhouse that would appeal to the undiscriminating male viewer. Not just the obvious things like Eliza in weird white fishnets, but also the rather comic book-y aspects (in which area, Epitaph One is the worst offender IMO).
no subject
Date: 2009-12-10 11:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-10 05:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-10 05:43 pm (UTC)Every once and a while Whedon will remind me that he's just a huge comic book geek. (grins). Firefly was full of comic book moments, as were Buffy and Angel. Heck Primeval was taken from Alan Moore's Promestheus (sp?). And the whole story behind the jacket was stolen from Frank Miller's Sin City.
Which I sort of appreciated, but I think it turned other people off.
Much like the soap opera aspects. (Whedon was also a soap fan - which he's let slip with references to Party of Five, Passions, Dawson's Creek, and General Hospital). Mileage varies. But hey, before Buffy, I was a huge X-men fan. And always loved the daytime serials even if they are a dying art form (which alas they are...).
That said, I agree - the future/present sequences are very comic booky and not in a good way. Found them to be a bit on the cliche side actually. I'd seen that done one too many times. X-Men did it in Days of Future Past, and of course there's Terminator, Children of Men, etc...
no subject
Date: 2009-12-14 10:59 am (UTC)Yep. And if anyone doubts it, they just have to pick up almost any super hero title available out there and then take a good, hard look at Illyria.